> Multiple Scheme products would be great.
Really? We've had "multiple Scheme products" for decades now. And
the evidence of greatness is...? In contrast, many languages have
gotten by with one or two implementations. And it has hurt them how?
[Sorry, irrespective of my own beliefs about how many Scheme
implementations is ideal, I could not allow such a blandly grandiose
remark go unchallenged.]
Shriram